https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66610
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blocks| |99728
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
PR99728 is similar, but I think that store-motion itself is the wrong place to
"tear apart" aggregate assignments. Taking the first example from the
testcase:
/* This loop doesn't get optimized away. */
void
loop2_using_struct_assignment (int num_iters, struct value *arr)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < num_iters; i++)
{
arr[0].union_field.int_field = i;
arr[0].type_code = TYPE_CODE_INT;
arr[1] = arr[0];
}
}
the aggregate assignment could be sunk out of the loop but then this moves
loads later which store-motion does not do in general.
Referenced Bugs:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99728
[Bug 99728] code pessimization when using wrapper classes around SIMD types
